Re: 5.10 LTS Kernel: 2 or 6 years?
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: 2021-01-26 17:35:51
Also in:
lkml
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 11:55:11AM -0800, Scott Branden wrote:
Hi All, The 5.10 LTS kernel being officially LTS supported for 2 years presents a problem: why would anyone select a 5.10 kernel with 2 year LTS when 5.4 kernel has a 6 year LTS.
Because they want to use all of the latest stuff that 5.10 provides them. Don't you want faster and more secure kernels for your devices?
Yet, various unofficial reports indicate it will be supported for 6 years.
Rumors are nice, aren't they :)
And AOSP has already declared the use of 5.10 kernel in their Android S and T releases.
Publically? Where? And is that really the name of the new Android releases, I thought they switched to numbers now (hence the naming of the current android-common kernel branches, marketing is fun...)
Is there some way we could make the LTS support more clear. A 2 year declaration is not LTS any more.
Not true at all, a "normal" stable kernel is dropped after the next release happens, making their lifespan about 4 months long. 2 years is much longer than 4 months, so it still is a "long term supported" kernel in contrast, correct?
If 5.10 is "actually" going to be supported for 6 years it would be quite valuable to make such a declaration. https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html
Why? What would that change? Ok, seriously, this happens every year, and every year we go through the same thing, it's not like this is somehow new, right? I want to see companies _using_ the kernel, and most importantly, _updating_ their devices with it, to know if it is worth to keep around for longer than 2 years. I also, hopefully, want to see how those companies will help me out in the testing and maintenance of that kernel version in order to make supporting it for 6 years actually possible. So, are you planning on using 5.10? Will you will be willing to help out in testing the -rc releases I make to let me know if there are any problems, and to help in pointing out and backporting any specific patches that your platforms need for that kernel release? When I get this kind of promises and support from companies, then I am glad to bump up the length of the kernel support from 2 to 6 years, and I mark it on the web site. Traditionally this happens in Febuary/March once I hear from enough companies. Can I count on your support in this endeavor? Also, a meta-comment. Please reconsider using a single kernel version for longer than 2 years on systems that you actively support and maintain. It's generally a bad idea unless you are stuck with millions of out-of-tree code that something like a customer-unfriendly SoC vendor provides. If you are stuck in that type of situation, well they have decided to spend extra money to keep their out-of-tree code alive, so why are they forcing you to also spend extra money and energy? I can go on about this topic at length if you want me to, I have lots of examples of how to, and not to, maintain a kernel for a device for a long period of time... thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel